GOP wants to ban foodstamp-purchased junk food

[The Tiger Kingdom]

Junk food is cheap and tastes good *nods

And I should pay for you to buy it.

It's in my interests as a citizen not to have emaciated poor people cacking it on the street.

[Lillitania]

Maybe because they don't get enough money to buy healthier food with food stamps?

Again, let me restate what I said earlier:
Poor people buy unhealthy food not because they're too stupid to know otherwise - it's because it's cheap, and it's usually all you can reasonably afford if you're poor.
What this is isn't encouraging the poor to eat healthy, it's simply making food stamps less effective at feeding people.

I understand that junk food is cheaper than healthier foods, and I never called poor people stupid. Yes, produce and other all-natural products may cost more, but there are products available that are more nutritional than junk food and do not cost a fortune. I'm not poor or have ever been in a position that requires welfare, so perhaps I don't have the first-hand experience that either of you might have.

[The Tiger Kingdom]

relatively expensive

I really, really hope you mean that as relative to other costs, as opposed to relative meaning less than shocking.

It's expensive for poor people.

[Condunum]

Junk food is cheap and tastes good *nods

And I should pay for you to buy it.

Stop pretending it's some big fucking theft from you to keep people from starving.

[The Grey Wolf]

So they can eat junk food...I'm all for healthy food, and organic non pesticide whatever-the-fuck but your post is flawed.

How is my post flawed? Letting people eat junk food is better than letting them starve from their inability to afford adequate meals. It's not a very hard concept to grasp.

Potato chips and candy, keeping poor people from starving.

[The Tiger Kingdom]

Maybe because they don't get enough money to buy healthier food with food stamps?

Again, let me restate what I said earlier:
Poor people buy unhealthy food not because they're too stupid to know otherwise - it's because it's cheap, and it's usually all you can reasonably afford if you're poor.
What this is isn't encouraging the poor to eat healthy, it's simply making food stamps less effective at feeding people.

I understand that junk food is cheaper than healthier foods, and I never called poor people stupid.

Fair enough...

Yes, produce and other all-natural products may cost more, but there are products available that are more nutritional than junk food and do not cost a fortune.

Name some that a poor person might buy and be able to prepare (if necessary) with resources at their disposal that are comparable.

I'm not poor or have ever been in a position that requires welfare, so perhaps I don't have the first-hand experience that either of you might have.

I'll admit I don't have firsthand experience either. I've tried to make up for it by doing some research of my own into the topic.

[Crysuko]

How is my post flawed? Letting people eat junk food is better than letting them starve from their inability to afford adequate meals. It's not a very hard concept to grasp.

Potato chips and candy, keeping poor people from starving.

Meanwhile, all microwave meals have been exterminated.

[4years]

1. The increasing polarization of the big two parties in the USA, such that the 2. "Republicans" are more like fascists and the "Democrats" are more like Stalinists, ... 3. it deeply worries me.

I mean, 4. clearly autocracy, fascism, and Stalinism mixing/cobbling together in a big girthy already psychotic imperial power is one fucking recipe for disaster.

1. Republicans and Democracts are very similar.
2. because fascism and Stalinism have no actual content of their own and can therefore be said to correspond to the programs of said parties? Oh wait...
3. I am deeply worried, it not because of that.
4. The US isn't an autocracy, nor is it fascistic, nor is it Stalinistic.

[The Tiger Kingdom]

How is my post flawed? Letting people eat junk food is better than letting them starve from their inability to afford adequate meals. It's not a very hard concept to grasp.

Potato chips and candy, keeping poor people from starving.

It's actually true, judging from the diets they've recorded researching urban poverty.
Look it up.
What do you think they're eating, then, that's keeping them alive? Filet mignon? Caviar?

[Disserbia]

I approve of this, although I wonder if it is because junk food is cheaper and is sometimes all that is available in low income areas.

[Blasveck]

How is my post flawed? Letting people eat junk food is better than letting them starve from their inability to afford adequate meals. It's not a very hard concept to grasp.

Potato chips and candy, keeping poor people from starving.

Yes.

As someone who has been actually poor, thats exactly how it fucking is.

[Nigerian Kenya]

They've only attempted to repeal it 40 times thus far, not 47. Although Boehner is considering a 41st attempt.

This is a good proposal, it has my support. People living on welfare shouldn't be allowed to have the luxury of junk food; providing it just gives people one more reason to stay on welfare, and that drags down the economy, which is obviously terrible.

However, I implore the house to pass a continuing resolution, raise the debt ceiling, and pass the senate's immigration reform, before taking this issue up.

Considering that Congress spends the vast majority of its time doing nothing, fitting in an extra law would have no impact on the other laws being past. They're on hold anyway, so Congress might as well, you know, do some Congressing in the mean time.

Once they start the process of actually debating a continuing resolution or a debt ceiling increase, it's going to get very busy over there. And yes, Obama will likely have to negotiate over the debt ceiling; regardless of whether he wants to or not. It's simply how things work over there with a divided congress.

Passing any law, from house debate to house vote to senate debate to senate vote to president's signature can easily take a good two weeks. We can't really afford to spend two weeks on this right now when the government is less than 3 weeks away from having to shutdown. Once everything is calm in November or so, then pass this bill. It's an important bill, I don't deny that. But it's not high-priority.

[Neo-Mlytoria]

Look at the Wikipedia articles for both and see how many traits you can align. It's quite shocking really.

"Go to Wikipedia and agree with me" isn't an actual argument that will convince anyone here, just so you know.(1)

So is wanting everyone to be a liberty-less wage-and-debt slave to the government, essentially property, not Stalinism now?

*citation needed*(2)

1: No it's not an argument, it's a call to peer review. There is a thing called political science.
2: Hurr hurr hurr, say something that has weight to it why don't you?

[Condunum]

I really, really hope you mean that as relative to other costs, as opposed to relative meaning less than shocking.

It's expensive for poor people.

So relative to other costs, got it. Good. Because the other is... well, disheartening.

And you're right to call it that. Organic milk is two and a half times as expensive as generic brand, organic wheat bread is a dollar and a half more than bleached white bread, enriched or not. chips are at most two dollars for a large bag containing two dozen servings, while fruit snacks are upwards of four dollars for a two or three serving little box.

[Bezombia]

"Go to Wikipedia and agree with me" isn't an actual argument that will convince anyone here, just so you know.(1)

*citation needed*(2)

1: No it's not an argument, it's a call to peer review. There is a thing called political science.
2: Hurr hurr hurr, say something that has weight to it why don't you?

1. So you admit it's not an aruement? All right that was fast, moving on.
2. You basically just through your credibility in to a dumpster, burned the dumpster, threw it out a second story window, and then set off a nuclear bomb on it.

[Katganistan]

How is my post flawed? Letting people eat junk food is better than letting them starve from their inability to afford adequate meals. It's not a very hard concept to grasp.

Potato chips and candy, keeping poor people from starving.

The fact that you're scoffing shows you don't have a clue about their reality.

[The Tiger Kingdom]

"Go to Wikipedia and agree with me" isn't an actual argument that will convince anyone here, just so you know.(1)

*citation needed*(2)

1: No it's not an argument, it's a call to peer review. There is a thing called political science.

Let me say something:
I'm actually in the process of completing a double-major that will include poli sci. As such, I've taken no small number of such classes.
What you're doing isn't political science. It's either laziness or an inability to state an actual argument beyond baseless assertions.

2: Hurr hurr hurr, say something that has weight to it why don't you?

Oh, glass houses, buddy.
You gave me nothing to go on, so how could I give anything of substantial meaning back?

[The Grey Wolf]

Potato chips and candy, keeping poor people from starving.

Yes.

As someone who has been actually poor, thats exactly how it fucking is.

Bullshit detected.

[Edward Richtofen]

argument: Produce is hard to stomach, it makes me feel empty inside

[Sedikal]

I'm not inherently opposed to this bill but I understand that junk food is cheaper then health food and is a better budgeting option for families on food stamps.

[Nigerian Kenya]

But, why should the average taxpayer be paying for obesity? There really is no concrete reason. We can't do away with welfare or people will beg for money on the streets. But we need to have a system that gives people the help they need, but at the same time incentivizes them to get a job and start paying taxes and contributing to the economy. And a ban on buying junk food with food stamps is a very good step to take in order to accomplish that goal.

It's a great way to get the poor to starve, seeing as how you can't buy much fancy organic shit with food stamps, what with it being relatively expensive and all.
This measure would make sense, as NPE said, if it was in conjunction with a move to raise the amount of money put into food stamps so poor people could actually afford to buy healthy.
As it currently stands this is pretty much an attempt to replace junk food with a heaping helping of...nothing!

It's not about buying only organic food, it's about not buying fast food or candy, soda, etc. Not everything that isn't junk food is organic, and not everything that's not organic is junk food.

[Blasveck]

Yes.

As someone who has been actually poor, thats exactly how it fucking is.

Bullshit detected.

And why do you say that TGW?

[Crysuko]

1: No it's not an argument, it's a call to peer review. There is a thing called political science.
2: Hurr hurr hurr, say something that has weight to it why don't you?

1. So you admit it's not an aruement? All right that was fast, moving on.
2. You basically just through your credibility in to a dumpster, burned the dumpster, threw it out a second story window, and then set off a nuclear bomb on it.

1. Minor misspelling
2. I might just sig that

[The Tiger Kingdom]

Yes.

As someone who has been actually poor, thats exactly how it fucking is.

Bullshit detected.

Based on what, exactly? What's your argument? So far, all I've seen from you is "poor people don't deserve to eat because they're drug dealers "
Which is not something you really can stand on while calling other peoples' firsthand experiences bullshit.

[Lillitania]

Yes, produce and other all-natural products may cost more, but there are products available that are more nutritional than junk food and do not cost a fortune.

Name some that a poor person might buy and be able to prepare (if necessary) with resources at their disposal that are comparable.

I couldn't name products off the top of my head, but there are reasonably priced 'ready-to-go' TV dinners still around, it isn't the healthiest thing out there but it's better than potato chips. The food is cheap, they usually cost less than bags of potato chips or boxes of other junk foods.